以面對面、Moodle、Office 365進行課後活動對英文學習動機、學習成效及同儕互動之影響

Impact of Face-to-Face Interactions and Digital Learning Platforms on Learning Motivation, Learning Achievements and Peer Interaction in After-School Activities

10.6209/JORIES.202212_67(4).0001

鍾世潤(Shih-Jun Chung)；黃博聖(Po-Sheng Huang)

Moodle ； Office 365 ； 同儕互動 ； 課後活動 ； 學習動機 ； Moodle ； Office 365 ； peer interaction ； after-school activities ； learning motivation

教育科學研究期刊

67卷4期（2022 / 12 / 01）

1 - 34

英文

本研究目的在比較以面對面、Moodle、Office 365進行課後活動，對學生英文的學習動機、學習成效與同儕互動之影響。以課後活動形式為自變項，分成面對面組、Moodle組、Office 365組，分別以三種不同方式進行英文課程之課後活動，如課後分組討論、課後作業等，並探討其在不同層面之差異。本研究採量化為主、質化為輔的分析方式，以六班143位國中三年級學生為研究對象進行實驗，每種課後活動形式各兩個班級參與。研究結果顯示：一、不同課後活動形式對學習動機無顯著差異；二、面對面組之學習成效顯著優於Office 365組；三、Office 365組之同儕互動有高於面對面組之傾向；四、針對討論歷程分析發現，透過Moodle、Office 365之學習平台進行討論，會出現特定組員直接貼出解答、各組員直接任務分工等未進行小組討論之情況發生；五、對Moodle組而言，各組員之發言比例與學習成效、同儕互動為正相關；對Office 365組而言，各組員之發言比例與學習成效、學習動機為正相關。

With modern technological advancements, the rise of digital learning has helped teachers and students in many ways; for example, learning is becoming increasingly learner centric. In recent years, learning has been compromised because of school suspensions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital learning has helped to reduce the negative impacts on students' learning, and most students have shown a positive attitude toward digital learning. A learning management system provides a platform for learners to learn and interact with teachers or peers without time and space constraints. Moodle is one of the most popular and widely-used learning management systems. It is open source, offers different functional modules, and is available free of charge. However, according to recent literature, Moodle has several disadvantages. First, the topics discussed by students in the Moodle platform are not focused enough and not easy to be discussed in depth. Second, the interaction is not immediate because of a lack of instant notifications. Third, the interface is not user friendly and is thus difficult to operate. These drawbacks can hinder students' learning. Office 365 is another digital system that assists students' learning. Various functions of Office 365, such as Teams's real-time notifications and OneNote's recording function, complement Moodle. This study investigated the effects of after-school activities conducted through different media on students' motivation, learning achievement, and peer interaction. In present study, after-school activities were conducted face-to-face or via two learning platforms, Moodle and Office 365; the learning platform was considered the independent variables. In total, 143 middle school students were recruited as participants for an after-school activity and distributed into the face-to-face, Moodle, or Office 365 group. The quantitative data of three scales concerning with learning motivation, learning achievement and peer interaction were collected to represent their learning performance. Qualitative data were collected through textual analysis based on student responses to open-ended questions. The quantitative and qualitative data were then statistically analyzed with SPSS Statistics 23. The results of the quantitative analysis revealed the following results: (1) No significant difference was observed in learning motivation among the different groups. The reasons for the result may be that students were not familiar with learning management systems, the interface and function of the learning systems were complex, or student motivation to learn English was low. (2) The learning achievement of the face-to-face group was significantly higher than that of the Office 365 group. Office 365 has many functions, but it also increases the cognitive load on students. Additionally, middle school students in Taiwan are inexperienced with using learning management systems because of the lack of opportunities to do so. Furthermore, the focus of this research was not the formal school curriculum but after-school activities; therefore, gauging learning effectiveness was challenging. Finally, students are more familiar with face-to-face discussions, and this comfort increases the effectiveness of this mode of learning. (3) Students in the Office 365 group had a higher tendency to interact with peers than those in the face-to-face group. Interacting through Office 365 (as it provides voice and text input for discussions) removes the stress of public speaking, such as that experienced in face-to-face classes, thus increasing participation. However, the peer interaction in the Office 365 group was not significantly higher than that in the Moodle group because the students using Office 365 mainly used text input, which decreased the efficiency of their discussion. (4) Some groups of students using the learning management system (no matter Moodle group or Office 365 group) posted the answers to assignments in the chat room even before much group discussion, or they divided the work among themselves, and not discussing the assignment at all. The students seemed to be unfamiliar with the way in which group discussions are conducted through digital learning platforms. This inexperience was reflected in their lack of teamwork. (5) The ratio of discussions students posted on the Moodle platform (Moodle group) was positively correlated with their learning achievement and interaction with peers. The ratio of discussions students posted on the Office 365 platform (Office 365 group) was positively correlated with their learning achievement and learning motivation. The results have several implications. First, teachers should consider the most appropriate form of discussion for middle school students when planning group discussion activities during and after lessons. Second, although middle school students are better at learning through face-to-face discussion, the demand for distance learning and the use of digital platforms are increasing. Teachers should encourage the use of digital platforms by planning more exercises to implement through these platforms, thus improving students' learning performance as well as their efficiency in using these platforms. Third, the students in the Office 365 group had a higher tendency to interact with peers than did those in the face-to-face group. Thus, teacher may use Office 365 initially to make students willing to use digital platforms and for them to get familiar with its usage. Once students are comfortable using the platform, teachers can shift the focus to enhancing the effectiveness of learning. Fourth, when students are engaged in group discussions in after-school activities, only a limited number of students may participate, or students may directly provide answers without discussing them with their peers. Providing students with instructions and training on conducting group discussions may help them make more effective use of learning management systems. Finally, regarding the design of learning management systems, the registration and login procedures should be simplified, and the platform interface and operating functions should be more effectively integrated to make them user friendly. Doing so may enable novices to start and consistently use these systems more easily and reduce the time required by users to familiarize themselves with such systems.

1. 沈慶珩, C.-H.,黃信義, X.-Y.(2006)。網路同儕互評在Moodle系統上的應用。教育資料與圖書館學，43(3)，267-284。
   連結：
2. 汪耀華, Y.-H.,張基成, C.-C.(2018)。現象學取向的磨課師教學經驗隱含之意義。教育科學研究期刊，63(1)，141-171。
   連結：
3. 周君倚, C.-Y.,陸洛, L.(2014)。以科技接受模式探討數位學習系統使用態度─以成長需求為調節變項。資訊管理學報，21(1)，83-105。
   連結：
4. 陳彙芳, H.-F.,范懿文, Y.-W.(2000)。認知負荷對多媒體電腦輔助學習成效之影響研究。資訊管理研究，2(2)，45-60。
   連結：
5. 陳德懷, T.-W.,廖長彥, C. C.-Y.,鄭年亨, H. N.-H.,張菀真, W.-C.,簡子超, T.-C.(2017)。數位學校實踐與展望。教育科學研究期刊，62(2)，1-30。
   連結：
6. 楊宏珩, H.-H.,段曉林, H.-L.(2001)。合作學習─高中化學教學之行動研究。科學教育學刊，9(1)，55-77。
   連結：
7. 趙子揚, T.-Y.,宋曜廷, Y.-T.(2019)。中學生考試壓力與個人特性：潛在類別分析。教育科學研究期刊，64(3)，203-235。
   連結：
8. 劉政宏, C.-H.,黃博聖, P.-S.,蘇嘉鈴, C.-L.,陳學志, H.-C.,吳有成, Y.-C.(2010)。「國中小學習動機量表」之編製及其信、效度研究。測驗學刊，57(3)，371-402。
   連結：
9. 賴玲玲, L.-L.,林姝吟, S.-Y.(2016)。數位學習平台可用性研究。臺北市立圖書館館訊，33(4)，35-49。
   連結：
10. 臺灣線上學習高峰會（2019）。高等教育開放資源研究中心。https://hero.nycu.edu.tw/index.php/2019olst/【Online Learning Summit Taiwan. (2019). Research Center of Higher Educational Resources for Openness. https://hero.nycu.edu.tw/index.php/2019olst/】
11. Afzal, H.,Ali, I.,Khan, M. A.,Hamid, K.(2010).A study of university students’ motivation and its relationship with their academic performance.International Journal of Business and Management,5(4),80-88.
12. Aikina, T. Y.,Bolsunovskaya, L. M.(2020).Moodle-based learning: Motivating and demotivating factors.International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning,15(2),239-248.
13. Al-Ajlan, A. S.(2011).A comparative study between e-learning features, methodologies, tools, and new developments for e learning.Methodologies, tools and new developments for e-learning
14. Al-Husban, N. A.(2020).Critical thinking skills in asynchronous discussion forums: A case study.International Journal of Technology in Education,3(2),82-91.
15. Al-Jeraisy, M.,Mohammad, H.,Fayyoumi, A.,Rashideh, W.(2015).Web 2.0 in education: The impact of discussion board on student performance and satisfaction.Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology,14(2),247-258.
16. Almaiah, M. A.,Al-Khasawneh, A.,Althunibat, A.(2020).Exploring the critical challenges and factorsinfluencing the e-learning system usage during COVID-19 pandemic.Education and Information Technologies,25,5261-5280.
17. Ayan, E.(2015).Moodle as builder of motivation and autonomy in English courses.Open Journal of Modern Linguistics,5(1),6-20.
18. Badia, A.,Martín, D.,Gómez, M.(2019).Teachers’ perceptions of the use of moodle activities and their learning impact in secondary education.Tech Know Learn,24,483-499.
19. Balaji, M. S.,Chakrabarti, D.(2010).Student interactions in online discussion forum: Empirical research from "media richness theory" perspective.Journal of Interactive Online Learning,9(1),1-22.
20. Bošković, V.,Gajic, T.,Tomic, I.(2014).Moodle in English language teaching.Sinteza 2014 -Impact of the Internet on Business Activities in Serbia and Worldwide
21. Bower, M.,Wittmann, M.(2009).Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of LAMS and Moodle as learning design technologies.Proceedings of the 4th International LAMS Conference 2009: Opening Up Learning Design
22. Brower, H. H.(2003).On emulating classroom discussion in a distance-delivered OBHR course: Creating an on-line learning community.Academy of Management Learning and Education,2(1),22-36.
23. Calderon, O.,Sood, C.(2018).Evaluating learning outcomes of an asynchronous online discussion assignment: A post-priori content analysis.Interactive Learning Environments,28(1),3-17.
24. Caminero, A. C.,Hernandez, R.,Ros, S.,Robles-Gómez, A.,Tobarra, L.(2013).Choosing the right LMS: A performance evaluation of three open-source LMS.2013 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON),Berlin, Germany:
25. Cavus, N.(2015).Distance learning and learning management systems.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,191(2),872-877.
26. Cavus, N.,Zabadi, T.(2014).A comparison of open source learning management systems.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,143,521-526.
27. Chen, P.,Xiang, J.,Sun, Y.,Ban, Y.,Chen, G.,Huang, R.(2015).Exploring students’ discussion in face to face and online synchronous learning.Emerging issues in smart learning. Lecture notes in educational technology,Berlin, Heidelberg:
28. Costa, C.,Alvelos, H.,Teixeira, L.(2012).The use of Moodle e-learning platform: A study in a Portuguese University.Procedia Technology,5,334-343.
29. Daraghmi, E. Y.,Hsiao, C.-H.,Yuan, S.-M.(2014).A new cloud storage support and Facebook enabled Moodle module.2014 7th International Conference on Ubi-Media Computing and Workshops,Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia:
30. Deng, L.,Tavares, N. J.(2013).From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students’ motivation and experiences in online communities.Computers & Education,68,167-176.
31. Devis, F. D.(1993).User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions, and behavioral impacts.International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,38(3),475-487.
32. Fayanto, S.,Kawuri, M.,Jufriansyah, A.,Setiamukti, D.,Sulisworo, D.(2019).Implementation e-learning based Moodle on physics learning in senior high school.Indonesian Journal of Science and Education,3(2),93-102.
33. Flanders, N. A.(1970).Analyzing teaching behavior.Addison-Wesley.
34. Graf, F.,List, B.(2005).An evaluation of open source e-learning platforms stressing adaptation issues.Fifth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT’05),Kaohsiung, Taiwan:
35. Green R. A.,Farchione, D.,Hughes, D. L.,Chan, S. P.(2013).Participation in asynchronous online discussion forums does improve student learning of gross anatomy.Anatomical Sciences Education,7(1),71-76.
36. Hertz-Lazarowitz, R.(1992).Understanding interactive behaviors: Looking at six mirrors of the classroom.Interaction in cooperative groups
37. Moore, M. G.(1989).Three types of interaction.The American Journal of Distance Education,3(2),1-7.
38. Mursyidah, H.,Hermoyo, R. P.,Suwaibah, D.(2021).Does flipped learning method via MOODLE can improve outcomes and motivation of discrete mathematics learning during COVID-19 pandemic?.Journal of Physics: Conference Series,1720(1)
39. Naddabi, Z. A.(2007).A Moodle course: Design and implementation in English for academic purposes instruction.E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education,San Diego, U.S.:
40. Nedeva, V.,Dimova, E.,Dineva, S.(2010).Overcome disadvantages of e-learning for training English as foreign language.The 5th International Conference on Virtual Learning ICVL 2010,Romania, Europe:
41. Oláhová, E.(2018).Using the Office 365 cloud solution in the education process.International Scientific Days 2018,Prague, Czech Republic:
42. Radha, R.,Mahalakshmi, K.,Kumar, V. S.,Saravanakumar, A. R.(2020).E-Learning during lockdown of Covid-19 pandemic: A global perspective.International Journal of Control and Automation,13(4),1088-1099.
43. Robb, M.,Fisher, M.(2015).Functionality tools: Time management approaches for facilitating an on-line course in Moodle.Teaching and Learning in Nursing,10(4),196-199.
44. Ryan, R. M.(Ed.)(2012).The Oxford handbook of human motivation.Oxford University Press.
45. Sanosi, A. B.(2018).The effect of quizlet on vocabulary acquisition.Asian Journal of Education and E-Learning,6(4),71-77.
46. Spector, M.(Ed.),Lockee, B. B.(Ed.),Childress, M. D.(Ed.)(2016).Learning, design, and technology. An international compendium of theory, research, practice, and policy.Springer International Publishing.
47. Sweller, J.(1988).Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning.Cognitive Science,12(2),257-285.
48. Waheed, M.,Kaur, K.,Ain, N.,Hussain, N.(2015).Perceived learning outcomes from Moodle: An empirical study of intrinsic and extrinsic motivating factors.Information Development,32(4),1001-1013.
49. Wahyuni, P.,Kusumawati, M.(2021).The use of Microsoft Office 365 in mathematics learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.Proceeding International Conference on Science and Engineering,4,162-165.
50. Wang, A. I.,Tahir, R.(2020).The effect of using Kahoot! for learning-A literature review.Computers & Education,149
51. Wang, Q.,Woo, H. L.(2007).Comparing asynchronous online discussions and face-to-face discussions in a classroom setting.British Journal of Educational Technology,38(2),272-286.
52. Zheng, M.,Spires, H.(2011).Teachers’ interactions in an online graduate course on Moodle: A social network analysis perspective.Meridian K-12 Computer Technologies Journal,13(2)
53. Zulfikar, A. F.,Muhidin, A.,Pranoto, S. W.,Trisetyarso, A.,Abbas, B. S.,Kang, C. H.(2019).The effectiveness of online learning with facilitation method.Procedia Computer Science,161,32-40.
54. 王金國, C.-K.,孫台鼎, T.-D.(2014)。從學生的負向經驗省思合作學習的實施。臺灣教育評論月刊，3(7)，88-91。
55. 李世忠, S.-C.,趙倩筠, C.-Y.,葉盈秀, Y.-H.(2011)。Moodle教學平台視覺介面之設計。自由軟體與教育科技研討會論文集，臺北市，臺灣=Taipei, Taiwan:
56. 李勇輝, Y.-H.(2017)。學習動機、學習策略與學習成效關係之研究─以數位學習為例。經營管理學刊，14，68-86。
57. 李智仁, C.-J.,王金國, C.-K.(2015)。在國中數學領域中實行分組合作學習的經驗與省思。臺灣教育評論月刊，4(2)，112-115。
58. 施文玲, W.-L.(2007)。以學習理論為基礎的數位化教學策略。生活科技教育月刊，40(2)，32-41。
59. 柯華葳, H.-W.,陳明蕾, M.-L.,李俊仁, J.-R.,陳冠銘, K.-M.(2019)。,國家教育研究院=National Academy for Educational Research。
60. 徐玉婷, Y.-T.(2004)。國立成功大學=National Cheng Kung University。
61. 高瑜璟, Y.-J.(2006)。數位學習－學習的新趨勢。網路社會學通訊期刊，57
62. 康妙齡, M.-L.(2012)。Moodle在日語會話二教學上的應用與成效。電腦科學與教育科技學刊，2(1)，20-30。
63. 張方瑜, F.-Y.,廖維國, W.-G.,王玉璿, Y.-X.,蘇勃郡, B.-J.,許庭嘉, T.-C.(2016)。使用不同學習管理平台於翻轉教學之互動行為分析。第20屆全球華人計算機教育應用大會（GCCCE 2016），香港，中國=Hong Kong, China:
64. 張其純, Q.-C.,高碧連, B.-L.,陳淑慧, S.-H.(2013)。運用Moodle數位學習平台提昇學習滿意度－某區域教學醫院為例。管理資訊計算，2(1)，233-244。
65. 張勝茂, S.-M.,李武璋, W.-Z.,林永祥, Y.-X.(2007)。以Moodle建置國民小學「數位學習課程管理平台」之可行性研究。科技教育課程改革與發展學術研討會論文集
66. 陳國蕙, K.-H.(2009)。國立嘉義大學=National Chiayi University。
67. 陳國蕙, K.-H.,洪志成, C.-C.(2007)。「案例教學策略」對商職民商法課程學習成效之影響。國民教育研究學報，19，109-140。
68. 薛慶友, Q.-Y.,傅潔琳, C.-L.(2015)。數位學習平台的應用特色與評析。臺灣教育評論月刊，4(4)，77-84。

1. (2023)。國英雙語平衡程度對臺灣大學生執行功能與兩類創造力表現的影響。教育科學研究期刊，68(4)，191-225。
2. (2023)。以混合方法探討心流經驗的中介效果對技術型高中學生專業英文詞彙競賽學習動機與學習成效之影響。教育科學研究期刊，68(4)，35-65。
3. (2024)。結合反思平臺之數位敘事教學對研究生反思表現、數位敘事自我效能及小組數位敘事表現之影響。教育科學研究期刊，69(1)，1-33。